justcausefandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:UH-10 Chippewa
Name The name and designation would be a definite nod at Bell's UH-1 "Iroquois", especially since there were multiple units outfitted for ground attack roles during Vietnam, ie at least 4 of Australia's 9th squadron RAAF's UH-1H in 1969 were equipped with M134 7.62mm miniguns (2 total) and 7 round rocket pods (one on each side) we nicknamed them Bushrangers, they also mounted twin M60s as door guns. They were retired specifically in 1989. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UH-1_Iroquois The only thing the UH-10 doesn't really have so much is the distinctive Huey thump to the rotor noise. CeriCat (talk) 08:02, May 11, 2014 (UTC) :The UH-10 is also much smaller. I'll add this to the article. GMRE (talk) 08:47, May 11, 2014 (UTC) ::I hadn't really checked that closely. I haven't actually seen one in one piece on the ground since the RAAF took the 9th's out of service and even with my memory that's a long time ago. CeriCat (talk) 09:09, May 11, 2014 (UTC) :::I've only seen them in pictures and TV, but a UH-1 always looks huge. UH-10 looks like a van, but the UH-1 looks like a half a bus. GMRE (talk) 09:15, May 11, 2014 (UTC) ::::Quite probably the UH-1D/H, they both had a longer fuselage (based off Bell's model 205 instead of the 204) to better fit troops (upto 13). Though other variants all got equipped with loadouts the nicknames in Nam were "Cobra" for MG or miniguns, "Hog" for rocket pods, and "slicks" for unarmed models. They're a good all rounder, still used around the world for tasks like SAR. The 204 fuselage is about 4 feet shorter than the 205 though. 204 is 12.69 metres or 41 feet 8 inches according to Bell, quick look for 205 states it's 41 inches longer or 104cm. Basically if the troop compartment features a single window it's a 204 variant, double window it's a 205 variant, that's the easiest visual way to tell the difference. :::Just done a visual estimate and done a comparison using the map with icons disabled, looks to be around 12-13 metres long from tip of nose to end of tail. So not definitive proof, but it definitely comparing to a old picture of the UH-1E looks like a model 204 body though it doesn't have a singular exhaust for the engine, it's got one on either side of the fuselage which is not a model 204/205 feature period, and that tends to make them look bigger in general since it is a massive unit. CeriCat (talk) 10:18, May 11, 2014 (UTC) Appearance Is it just me,or does it resemble the Delta 5H4 Boxhead from just cause 1.SomeRandomHuman (talk) 23:27, August 22, 2015 (UTC) :As a matter of fact buddy it is the successor to said vehicle. [[User:Anonymous230385|'Anonymous'230385]] [[User talk:Anonymous230385|'Any questions? Wanna talk?']] 23:48, August 22, 2015 (UTC)User:Anonymous230385 Black hawk attack helicopter? So why is the black hawk an attack helicopter rather than a transport one? GMRE (talk) 21:11, April 9, 2016 (UTC) :Well it really is both :It's first usage was in 1983 during the U.S. intervention in Grenada, but that was intended as a airborne troop carrier type helicopter (basically transport) :Nowadays, there is this [[User:Anonymous230385|'Anonymous'230385]] [[User talk:Anonymous230385|'Any questions? Wanna talk?']] 23:31, April 9, 2016 (UTC)